English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare the performance of the T1 3D subtraction technique and the conventional 2D dynamic contrast enhancement (DCE) technique in diagnosing Cushing’s disease. Materials and Methods: Twelve patients with clinically and biochemically proven Cushing’s disease were included in the study. In addition, 23 patients with a Rathke’s cleft cyst (RCC) diagnosed on an MRI with normal pituitary hormone levels were included as a control, to prevent non-blinded positive results. Postcontrast T1 3D fast spin echo (FSE) images were acquired after DCE images in 3T MRI and image subtraction of preand postcontrast T1 3D FSE images were performed. Inter-observer agreement, interpretation time, multiobserver receiver operating characteristic (ROC), and net benefit analyses were performed to compare 2D DCE and T1 3D subtraction techniques. Results: Inter-observer agreement for a visual scale of contrast enhancement was poor in DCE (κ = 0.57) and good in T1 3D subtraction images (κ = 0.75). The time taken for determining contrast-enhancement in pituitary lesions was significantly shorter in the T1 3D subtraction images compared to the DCE sequence (P < 0.05). ROC values demonstrated increased reader confidence range with T1 3D subtraction images (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94-1.00) compared with DCE (95% CI: 0.700.92) (P < 0.01). The net benefit effect of T1 3D subtraction images over DCE was 0.34 (95% CI: 0.12-0.56). For Cushing’s disease, both reviewers misclassified one case as a nonenhancing lesion on the DCE images, while no cases were misclassified on T1 3D subtraction images. Conclusion: The T1 3D subtraction technique shows superior performance for determining the presence of enhancement on pituitary lesions compared with conventional DCE techniques, which may aid in diagnosing Cushing’s disease.

investigative magnetic resonance imaging

Comparison of 3D Volumetric Subtraction Technique and 2D Dynamic Contrast Enhancement Technique in the Evaluation of Contrast Enhancement for Diagnosing Cushing's Disease